[vrln]

Just edited my earlier sum up post and took out the controversial made for R2R etc comments. I now agree it does not make sense...

 

[regal]

Quote:

I've got no clue about this recording stuff but from my own ears my W4S sigma delta DAC outperforms my Monarchy NM24 DAC which is R2R about 60-70% of the time with newer recordings.  Maybe artists are currently asking their mastering engineers for a type of sound that sigma delta dacs do well.  If thats the case then we are not talking about whether or not something sounds "modern" but we are talking about current mainstream recording and mastering preferences. 

The Monarchy is  using passive I/V on the PCM1704 which just doesn't work well.  The PCM1704 is a very difficult chip to implement correctly,  designers go to great lengths to give this chip an analog stage with near zero input impedance,  unfortunately monarchy didn't.   You probably notice it sounds worse on louder complex passages,  this is where the compliance voltage on the i-out of the PCM1704 is at its highest with the monarchy implementation.   The older DAC-50 monarchy with the PCM63K's don't exibit this problem. 

 

[Parafeed]

 
Quote:

To the original topic,  I think there is a lot of armchair quarter backing with people putting down MSB,  the W4S Sabre didn't impress me at all.  And it looks like no one at this DAC shootout were impressed either:
http://www.stereo.net.au/forums/showthread.php/26992-DAC-Shootout 
 
Unless I'm wrong the W4S is the best implementation of the sabre available.   These impressions are not good.    

I don't know whether this qualifies as armchair quarter backing or whether the W4S is the best implementation of the Sabre available - I've not heard them all.
 
I can't remember where I posted (it might not have been on this thread), but I loaned a MSB Platinum IV Sig for 10 days and was able to A/B at length against the W4S DAC2. I organized a DAC "shoot-out" day where several other friends had the opportunity to compare the DAC's on headphones as well as through a speaker. Not one person present rated the MSB DAC as being the best of the bunch, or the W4S as being the worst. Some of the comments on the W4S DAC2 over on that AU forum make no sense to me. But everyone is entitled to an opinion. Even if the MSB DAC ($18000) cost the same as the W4S DAC, I'd still personally opt for the W4S over the MSB.

 

[IPodPJ]

Quote:

Even if the MSB DAC ($18000) cost the same as the W4S DAC, I'd still personally opt for the W4S over the MSB.

And I'd venture to say statements like that are exactly why MSB posted that unfriendly page on the Sabre.

 
Hopefully you'll get a chance to listen to the Audio-gd Reference 7 (PCM1704UK) before they discontinue it.  I'd love to hear your thoughts on it, as well as their new and less expensive NFB-7 (Sabre32).

 

[regal]

Parafeed,  I am not surprised,  the MSB analog stage is not something I would pay that kind of money for. 
 
You mentioned your like of the R2R Ad1865 NOS dac's like the Audionote,  was this with headphones?  Reason I ask is there is some 13 microseond offset between channels.   I'm sorry if this is off topic but I value your impressions,  do you think this L&R timing delay is insignificant for headphones or is a problem that needs dealt with?
 
This does relates to the topic somewhat in that modern DAC's don't have these issues,  the Sabre has got to be the easiest Dac to build around (not counting the PS),  yet this is sort of its achilles heel,  the lack of flexibility. 
 
And that upper midrange issue,  I can't believe you didn't hear it in the W4S,  I guess it depends on what genre of music one listens to.   The aussies and myself are avid electric guitar aficionados ,  I just haven't found a S-D that reproduces the Les Paul or other classic e-guitars like the Audio-Gds or even older DAC's like my Audio Alchemy (AD1862), Adacom Ad700, or Pass D1.   I think femael voices and electric guitar  both fall right smack in the midrange where are hearing is more acute than our fourier transform       distortion evaluationsthat just fall short of how our ears process sound. 

 

[Parafeed]

Quote:

Hopefully you'll get a chance to listen to the Audio-gd Reference 7 (PCM1704UK) before they discontinue it.  I'd love to hear your thoughts on it, as well as their new and less expensive NFB-7 (Sabre32).

The Ref 7 was one of the DAC's present at the DAC "shoot-out" day. I've owned several DAC's which have used the PCM1704. IMHO, it's up there with the best of them. Reference, but musical. (Which was probably the biggest complaint about the MSB - more hi-fi than music. Stunning, but boring. One person referred to cymbals sounding like they were made of plastic when the upsampler was switched on. It was dubbed the "Plasticizer". And he was right, there was something very unnatural about the decay of a cymbal strike with the upsampler. The sound improvement - more body - SE over balanced was somewhat surprising. But maybe not, as in SE mode the DAC's are switched into a parallel configuration, rather than differential. And the strangest of all..... The MSB DAC did not like using an autoformer pre-amp. Sounded like one channel was out of phase with the other. Which it wasn't - verified with a scope.) Anyway, I've ordered a Ref7 for myself.

 

[Parafeed]

 
Quote:

Parafeed,  I am not surprised,  the MSB analog stage is not something I would pay that kind of money for.

Not got a clue what is going on under the MSB covers. It would have been a bit cheeky to take a screwdriver to it as it was "loaned" to me.
 
Quote:

You mentioned your like of the R2R Ad1865 NOS dac's like the Audionote,  was this with headphones?  Reason I ask is there is some 13 microseond offset between channels.   I'm sorry if this is off topic but I value your impressions,  do you think this L&R timing delay is insignificant for headphones or is a problem that needs dealt with?

You've got me there. Not quite sure what delay are you talking about. The invertor, I guess. I've owned and built several AD1865 DAC's and listened with headphones, full-range horns and more conventional speakers. As I'm not sure what the offset/delay is you are referring to, I can't really comment. But gut feeling... 13 microseconds.... I doubt that anyone would be able to tell the difference in a blind A/B where one channel is delayed by 13 microseconds.
 
My current AD1865 DAC is the least "adventurous" of them all. No transformer I/V, just a raindrop_hui board from eBay (OP stage circuit traces cut), 100R I/V, DIYHIFiSupply ECC88 CCS'd Mu stage, in a modushop case.
 

 
Quote:

This does relates to the topic somewhat in that modern DAC's don't have these issues,  the Sabre has got to be the easiest Dac to build around (not counting the PS),  yet this is sort of its achilles heel,  the lack of flexibility.

Yes, and no. The ASRC can be disabled. You can feed it with PCM, you don't have to use the on-board SPDIF. I think you're right that the OS digital filter cannot be disabled.
 
Quote:

And that upper midrange issue,  I can't believe you didn't hear it in the W4S,  I guess it depends on what genre of music one listens to. 

 
I don't know what to say to that. I listen to just about everything from classical to heavy metal. The Sabre can sound sibilant. But if you compare it back to back with another DAC that has the Sabre's resolution, the sibilance is there on the recording. Some of what has been described.... I can only assume that it's a DAC fresh from the box without any burn-in time. That's the only explanation I can offer. I mean, I'm more than sensitive to upper midrange. When I listen on Lowther's any issues with mids are only accentuated, not hidden.
 
Quote:

The aussies and myself are avid electric guitar aficionados ,  I just haven't found a S-D that reproduces the Les Paul or other classic e-guitars like the Audio-Gds or even older DAC's like my Audio Alchemy (AD1862), Adacom Ad700, or Pass D1.   I think femael voices and electric guitar  both fall right smack in the midrange where are hearing is more acute than our fourier transform       distortion evaluationsthat just fall short of how our ears process sound.

 
Again, I don't know what to say. Perhaps my hearing is defective. Guitar "tone" is something I'm particularly sensitive to as a guitar player. Only the other day I listened to Hank Marvin playing a Favino acoustic guitar with the W4S and thought that it was the most "honest" sounding reproduction of that instrument I've heard from any DAC - period!

 

[regal]

Quote:

 
 
 
Again, I don't know what to say. Perhaps my hearing is defective. Guitar "tone" is something I'm particularly sensitive to as a guitar player. Only the other day I listened to Hank Marvin playing a Favino acoustic guitar with the W4S and thought that it was the most "honest" sounding reproduction of that instrument I've heard from any DAC - period!

No the brain is just not predictable,  we all hear differently,  no one likes/dislikes can be right or wrong.
 
Thanks for the info on the AD1865,  there is a 13 microsecond delay between L&R channels if not compensated for prior to the DAC but you confirmed my suspition that it is inaudible and explained why AudioNote and just about every other designer accepts it as is.  I just wasn't sure about headphones being close to the ears compared to speakers.  I can point you to the info on why the offset is present via PM if interested as it is quite a bit OT here.
 
thanks again hope you enjoy your RE7,  my RE1 will be here later this week and can't wait.
 

 

[ciphercomplete]

 
Quote:

The Monarchy is  using passive I/V on the PCM1704 which just doesn't work well.  The PCM1704 is a very difficult chip to implement correctly,  designers go to great lengths to give this chip an analog stage with near zero input impedance,  unfortunately monarchy didn't.   You probably notice it sounds worse on louder complex passages,  this is where the compliance voltage on the i-out of the PCM1704 is at its highest with the monarchy implementation.   The older DAC-50 monarchy with the PCM63K's don't exibit this problem. 

I have owned and thoroughly enjoyed this DAC for 2 years and your post completely ruined it for me. 

 
I have played a ton of complex passages through both my DACs today and each time the Monarchy seems to fall short when compared to the Wyred.  Ignorance was bliss.  I used to think it was room reflections but the issues magically went away when I listened to the Wyred and I never put two and two together. The Monarchy has a ton of nice virtues but I don't know if I am going to be able to get over this lol.  I will probably sell it and tell the buyer to stay away from this particular thread on headfi.  Its such a small thing to get riled up about too.  Its still the second best DAC I have had in my system.  Oh well.  
 
Or this could all be a conveinient excuse to go shopping again.

 

 

[Jon L]

Quote:

 
 
To the original topic,  I think there is a lot of armchair quarter backing with people putting down MSB,  the W4S Sabre didn't impress me at all.  And it looks like no one at this DAC shootout were impressed either:
http://www.stereo.net.au/forums/showthread.php/26992-DAC-Shootout 
 
Unless I'm wrong the W4S is the best implementation of the sabre available.   These impressions are not good.    

As far as that shootout, one must realize it was FAR from any kind of controlled A-B comparison, and most of the listening panel were the actual makers of the DAC's being compared, except no one from W4S

 In addition, all the other DAC's had tube output stage, with W4S and modded Oppo being the only ones without tube output.  Lastly, the "winner" DAC is a made-to-order, one-at-a-time $5000 DAC (with tube output) that the designer professed taking "5 years" to perfect from vintage parts he's been finding.  

 

[Parafeed]

Quote:

Lastly, the "winner" DAC is a made-to-order, one-at-a-time $5000 DAC (with tube output) that the designer professed taking "5 years" to perfect from vintage parts he's been finding.  

I bit my tongue when I replied to the original post from Regal, finding myself thinking that the fanboyism (towards two of the "products") going on over there trumps the Audio-Gd "fan club" on this forum.

 

[nikongod]

 
Quote:

As far as that shootout, one must realize it was FAR from any kind of controlled A-B comparison, and most of the listening panel were the actual makers of the DAC's being compared, except no one from W4S

 In addition, all the other DAC's had tube output stage, with W4S and modded Oppo being the only ones without tube output.  Lastly, the "winner" DAC is a made-to-order, one-at-a-time $5000 DAC (with tube output) that the designer professed taking "5 years" to perfect from vintage parts he's been finding.  

Beyond a certain threshold of electronically measured performance human beings are unable to discern differences between any 2 pieces of gear. Period. If you cant tell 2 things apart how can one possibly be better than another? The simple answer is that it cant. They sound the same to the ear. Sounds better and worse describe differences. Perhaps in only the very broadest sense, but audible differences nonetheless.
 
The only way to make something that sounds different (and after we establish that the 2 things SOUND different we can fight over what sounds better and worse) compared to something that looks good on paper is to make something that looks worse on paper. Whether the differences in sound are better or worse is for the listener to decide. We could do what western electric did before measurements were common and rate gear by the general opinion of a group of listeners. Like they did in that test!
 
It is not particularly difficult to make gear that measures very very well. Making gear that sounds good... well, thats a matter of opinion which leaves plenty of room for people who make gear that sounds different dosnt it? The sad thing is not the guy who spent $5000 on a DAC because he likes the way it sounds the sad thing is the guy who bought a $1500 DAC that sounds EXACTLY like a $200 one. DBT it... I'd recommend NOT posting your findings. At best you will be mocked for being unable to hear differences beyond the thresholds of even exceptional hearing.
 
edited:
Im not sure if I quoted the right person. hmm. My bad for not following the 3-minute rule.

 

[regal]

Don't shoot the messanger.   Its just a link to a forum,  I've never even heard their super dac's but suspect I've built one for 1/3 the price
Quote:

I bit my tongue when I replied to the original post from Regal, finding myself thinking that the fanboyism (towards two of the "products") going on over there trumps the Audio-Gd "fan club" on this forum.

 

[Beresford]

  ......
 
My current AD1865 DAC is the least "adventurous" of them all. No transformer I/V, just a raindrop_hui board from eBay (OP stage circuit traces cut), 100R I/V, DIYHIFiSupply ECC88 CCS'd Mu stage, in a modushop case.
 
If you are still active on the forum, I would like to know what you think of the latest version of the AD1865 board raindrop_hui , and is there a current equivalent to the DIYHIFSupply active stage?
Many thanks.